Quantitative evaluation method for high-altitude route emergency handling effect

Abstract

The invention discloses a quantitative evaluation method for a high-altitude air route emergency handling effect. The method comprises the following steps: dividing emergency types; establishing an evaluation index system for handling different types of emergencies; setting a secondary evaluation index calculation method and an evaluation standard; objective operation data of each secondary evaluation index is extracted and calculated; calculating the specific numerical value of each secondary evaluation index; and obtaining a quantitative score of the emergency command level of the controller in the high-altitude route emergency. The method solves the problem that the ability and effect of the controller to deal with unconventional emergencies of a high-altitude air route cannot be accurately and quantitatively described in the existing air traffic control command work, and provides support for scientifically evaluating the skills of the controller and guaranteeing the safe operation of an air traffic control system. An air traffic control unit can use the method to comprehensively evaluate the emergency command capability of the controller, and can apply the method to annual retraining or skill fighting of the controller, so that special skill training and targeted review training can be conveniently organized to improve the training effect and quality.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of civil aviation air traffic control, and in particular relates to a quantitative evaluation method for handling effects of sudden incidents on high-altitude airways. Background Art

[0002] The flight of an aircraft in the airway is the longest flight segment in the flight plan in terms of flight time and distance, generally referring to the flight at an altitude of more than 6,000 meters above standard atmospheric pressure. Under normal circumstances, aircraft in high-altitude airways include three flight states: ascending, descending and cruising. Since there are many flight conflicts and they are not easy to find, the controller needs to plan the control plan in advance according to the flight plan and make scientific and reasonable control decisions before the risk of conflict occurs. The air traffic control bureaus in various regions of my country and their affiliated units have established indicators for evaluating the efficiency of airway operations in accordance with relevant laws and regulations to judge the business capabilities of controllers, but all indicators are applicable to the performance evaluation under normal operating conditions. When an emergency occurs to a group or individual aircraft in the airway, the controller will follow the corresponding special situation handling checklist for emergency command to ensure the safety of all aircraft operations. However, the currently implemented special situation handling checklist only lists the handling process and coordination steps for dealing with different emergencies, and does not make a scientific and accurate quantitative evaluation of the emergency response capabilities of controllers under high-altitude airway emergencies. The Chinese invention patent "A quantitative evaluation method for control efficiency of high-altitude airway flight" (authorized patent number: ZL202110924769.2) discloses a method for quantitatively evaluating the decision-making ability and technical level of controllers when commanding high-altitude aircraft, but this method is for the method under the normal operation state at high altitude, and is not suitable for the evaluation of the emergency service ability of controllers in high-altitude emergencies; the Chinese invention patent application "A quantitative evaluation method for the handling effect of emergency events in the terminal area" (application number: 202310437771.6) discloses an evaluation method for how to evaluate the emergency response ability of controllers when an emergency event occurs in the terminal area, but the flight characteristics and command strategies of controllers in high-altitude airways are significantly different from those in the terminal area, and the evaluation indicators and evaluation methods involved in the application cannot be fully applied to the emergency command of high-altitude airways. Therefore, formulating a quantitative evaluation method for the handling effect of emergency events in high-altitude airways is of great significance to improving the evaluation of the skill level of controllers and ensuring the safety of the air traffic control system. However, there is currently no unified evaluation method or technical standard for quantifying the emergency service capabilities of controllers in high-altitude route emergencies. Summary of the invention

[0003] In order to solve the above problems, the purpose of the present invention is to provide a quantitative evaluation method for handling emergencies in high-altitude airways.

[0004] In order to achieve the above object, the quantitative evaluation method for handling high-altitude route emergencies provided by the present invention comprises the following steps performed in sequence:

[0005] 1) Classify emergencies according to the nature of emergencies of civil aircraft flying on high-altitude routes;

[0006] 2) Establish an evaluation index system for handling different types of emergencies, including three first-level evaluation indicators and corresponding second-level evaluation indicators for each first-level evaluation indicator;

[0007] 3) Set the calculation method and evaluation criteria for the above-mentioned secondary evaluation indicators;

[0008] 4) When an emergency occurs to a civil aircraft flying on a high-altitude route, first determine the type of the emergency according to the method in step 1), then select the first and second level evaluation indicators related to the emergency response capability of the controller from the evaluation indicator system obtained in step 2), and then extract the objective operation data for calculating the above-mentioned second level evaluation indicators from the air traffic control automation system;

[0009] 5) Based on the objective operation data obtained in step 4), the specific values ​​of each secondary evaluation indicator are calculated using the calculation method of the secondary evaluation indicator set in step 3);

[0010] 6) According to the evaluation criteria set in step 3) and the specific values ​​of the secondary evaluation indicators obtained in step 5), a triangular membership function is constructed to determine the evaluation vector of each secondary evaluation indicator; the weight value of each secondary evaluation indicator is determined by using the hierarchical analysis method; the evaluation grade vector of each secondary evaluation indicator is set; and then the above evaluation vector, weight value and evaluation grade vector are compositely calculated to obtain the quantitative score of the emergency command level of the controller in the high-altitude route emergency, which is used to intuitively reflect the ability and effect of the controller in handling unconventional emergencies.

[0011] In step 1), the types of emergencies are divided into two categories: ① Group events of high-altitude flying aircraft: events that occur suddenly within the jurisdiction of high-altitude routes, have or may cause a decrease in air traffic control efficiency, suspension of air traffic services, and negative impacts on multiple aircraft, and require immediate measures to respond, including but not limited to: sudden catastrophic weather, interference from UFOs, and large-scale military activities; ② Individual events of high-altitude flying aircraft: events that occur suddenly within the jurisdiction of high-altitude routes, where individual aircraft encounter crashes, loss of contact, special situations, illegal interference, and severe weather, and have or may cause serious damage to the aircraft and casualties, and require immediate measures to respond, including but not limited to: engine failure, emergency fuel, mid-air fire, and bird strikes.

[0012] In step 2), the evaluation index system includes three first-level evaluation indicators: safety index, priority handover index and detour / avoidance index; wherein, the safety index includes five second-level evaluation indicators: flight time violating safety interval, flight time violating safety altitude, time for sector to resume normal operation, percentage of sector capacity reduction and percentage of increase in controller communication time; the priority handover index includes three second-level evaluation indicators: percentage of optimized descent altitude time, percentage of flight distance saved by priority handover and percentage of flight time saved by priority handover; the detour / avoidance index includes four second-level evaluation indicators: percentage of additional flight distance for detour / avoidance, percentage of additional delay time for detour / avoidance, proportion of detour / avoidance aircraft sorties and average flight time off route.

[0013] In step 3), the calculation method of the secondary evaluation index includes: a calculation method of a safety index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events; a calculation method of a priority handover index for high-altitude aircraft individual events; a calculation method of a detour / avoidance index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events;

[0014] The safety index calculation method for high-altitude aircraft group incidents and high-altitude aircraft individual incidents includes: calculating the average flight time x the time during which aircraft in the high-altitude route do not meet the safety interval requirements during the emergency handling period 1 , the calculation formula is In the formula, is the starting time when the aircraft pair k does not meet the safety separation requirements, is the time when aircraft pair k resumes meeting the safety separation requirement, N S The number of aircraft pairs that fail to meet safety separation requirements during emergency response;

[0015] Calculate the average flight time X during the emergency response period when the flight altitude of aircraft in the sector does not meet the safety altitude requirements 2 , the calculation formula is In the formula, is the starting time when aircraft i does not meet the safety altitude requirement, The time when aircraft i recovers to meet the safety altitude requirement, N H The number of aircraft that fail to meet the safety altitude requirements during emergency response;

[0016] Calculate the time X from the beginning of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route 3 , the calculation formula is X 3 =T N -T O , where T O is the starting time of the emergency, TN The time for the route to resume normal operation;

[0017] Calculate the percentage of traffic capacity reduction in high-altitude routes during emergency handling X 4 , the calculation formula is In the formula, Q S is the number of aircraft in the high-altitude route during the emergency response period, Q N The flight capacity of high-altitude routes under normal operating conditions;

[0018] Calculate the percentage of the controller's communication time during the emergency handling period exceeding that before the emergency X 5 , the calculation formula is Where, T DO is the communication time of the airway controller during the emergency handling period, T BO The communication time of the route controller before the emergency;

[0019] The calculation method for the priority transfer index of individual high-altitude aircraft incidents includes: calculating the ratio of the time saved by the controller taking emergency measures to make the special situation aircraft urgently descend to the transfer altitude during the emergency handling period to the original planned flight time X 6 , the calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency, is the time when the special situation aircraft i actually reaches the transfer altitude, The time when the special situation aircraft i is scheduled to arrive at the transfer altitude, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies;

[0020] Calculate the ratio of the flight distance saved when the controller adopts the emergency plan to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft during the emergency handling period to the originally planned flight distance X 7 , the calculation formula is In the formula, The flight distance transferred along the actual flight track for the special situation aircraft i, is the flight distance transferred along the planned flight path of the special situation aircraft i, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies;

[0021] Calculate the ratio of the flight time saved by the controller during the emergency handling period when the controller adopts the emergency plan to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft to the original planned flight time. 8 , the calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency, is the actual transfer time of special situation aircraft i, is the planned handover time of special situation aircraft i, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies;

[0022] The calculation method for the detour / avoidance index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events includes: calculating the ratio of the additional flight distance when the controller adopts the emergency plan to make the aircraft detour / avoid the dangerous area or special situation during the emergency handling process to the planned flight distance X 9 , the calculation formula is In the formula, The distance that the aircraft j flies along the actual flight path to bypass / avoid the aircraft. is the distance that aircraft j flies along the planned flight path, N PA Number of aircraft flights that detoured / avoided due to emergencies;

[0023] Calculate the ratio of the additional delay time to the planned flight time when the controller adopts an emergency plan to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during the emergency handling process. 10 , the calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency, The time when the circling / avoiding aircraft j actually arrives at the target position, The time when the circling / avoiding aircraft j is planned to arrive at the target position, N PA Number of aircraft flying around / avoiding due to emergencies;

[0024] Calculate the percentage of aircraft flights that the controller directs to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations in the process of emergency handling, which is the percentage of aircraft flights with normal capacity of high-altitude routes. 11 , the calculation formula is Where N PA The number of aircraft that flew around or avoided the incidents, Q N The flight capacity of high-altitude routes under normal operating conditions;

[0025] Calculate the average time X that the controller takes to deviate from the route during the emergency response process when directing aircraft to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations. 12 , the calculation formula is In the formula, The time when the flight of aircraft j deviates from the route for bypassing / avoiding is started. The starting time for the circling / avoiding aircraft j to resume flight on the route, N PA The number of aircraft flying around / avoiding due to emergencies.

[0026] In step 3), the evaluation criteria of the secondary evaluation indicators are set according to the actual operation of the aircraft in the high-altitude route, including: the average flight time x of the aircraft in the high-altitude route that does not meet the safety interval requirements during the emergency handling period 1 The permissible duration of an aircraft not meeting the safe flight interval in an emergency that needs to be set; the average flight duration of an aircraft in a sector not meeting the safe altitude requirement during the emergency handling period X 2 The allowable duration that the aircraft does not meet the safe flight altitude in the event of an emergency that needs to be set; the duration from the start of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route X 3 The time limit from the start of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route; the percentage of the decrease in traffic capacity in the high-altitude route during the emergency handling period X 4 The permissible value of the reduction in airway capacity during the emergency handling period that needs to be set; the percentage of the controller's communication time during the emergency handling period exceeding the percentage before the emergency X 5 The permissible value of the communication time increment of the route controller during the emergency handling period; during the emergency handling period, the controller adopts an emergency plan to make the special situation aircraft descend urgently, and the ratio of the time saved when reaching the transfer altitude to the original planned flight time is X 6 The lower limit requirement for the optimized descent altitude time during emergency handling is required; the ratio of the flight distance saved by the controller to the original planned flight distance when the controller adopts an emergency plan to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft during emergency handling. 7 The lower limit requirement for the distance saved by priority transfer during emergency handling is required; the ratio of the flight time saved by the controller when the emergency plan is adopted to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft during emergency handling to the original planned flight time is X 8 The lower limit requirement for the time saved by priority transfer during emergency handling; the ratio of the additional flight distance to the planned flight distance when the controller adopts emergency plans to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during emergency handling. 9 The upper limit of the additional flight distance required to fly around / avoid aircraft during emergency handling; the ratio of the additional delay time to the planned flight time when the controller adopts emergency plans to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during emergency handling. 10 The upper limit of the additional delay time for bypassing / avoiding aircraft during emergency handling is required; the percentage of aircraft flights that controllers use emergency plans to bypass / avoid dangerous areas or special situations in the normal capacity of high-altitude routes during emergency handling is X 11The upper limit requirement for the proportion of aircraft flights that fly around / avoid during emergency handling is required; during the emergency handling process, the average time that the controller uses emergency plans to command aircraft to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations to deviate from the route is X 12 The upper limit requirement for the average flight time of circling / avoiding aircraft off-route during emergency response is required.

[0027] In step 6), the evaluation level of the secondary evaluation index is divided into five levels: excellent, good, medium, pass and fail. The score from 0 to 100 is divided into five intervals according to the percentage system and corresponds to the corresponding level respectively. The level is assigned to the average score of the interval as the evaluation level vector V of the corresponding secondary evaluation index:

[0028] grade excellent good middle Pass Fail Interval (90，100] (80，90] (70，80] (60，70] (0，60] Assignment <![CDATA[v 1 =95]]> <![CDATA[v 2 =85]]> <![CDATA[v 3 =75]]> <![CDATA[v 4 =65]]> <![CDATA[v 5 =30]]>

[0029] In step 6), the formula of the composite operation is: S = W × A × V T

[0030] Where S is the quantitative score of the controller's emergency command level in high-altitude route emergencies, W is the weight value of the secondary evaluation index, A is the evaluation matrix composed of the evaluation vector of the secondary evaluation index, and V is the evaluation level vector of the secondary evaluation index.

[0031] The quantitative evaluation method for handling high-altitude route emergencies provided by the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0032] This method solves the problem that the ability and effect of air traffic controllers in handling high-altitude route unconventional emergencies cannot be accurately quantified in existing air traffic control command work, and provides support for scientific evaluation of air traffic controller skills and ensuring the safe operation of air traffic control systems. Air traffic control units can use this method to comprehensively evaluate the emergency command ability of air traffic controllers, and can apply it to the annual refresher training or skill competitions of air traffic controllers, so as to facilitate the organization of special skill training and targeted review training to improve the effect and quality of training. This more fair and objective evaluation method can also be used in skill competitions to select outstanding control talents. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0033] Figure 1 A flow chart of a quantitative evaluation method for handling high-altitude airway emergencies provided by the present invention;

[0034] Figure 2 It is a schematic diagram of the system structure of the high-altitude route emergency handling effect evaluation index formulated in the present invention;

[0035] Figure 3 It is a schematic diagram of the quantitative calculation method of the controller's high-altitude emergency command ability in the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0036] The present invention is described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

[0037] like Figure 1 As shown, the quantitative evaluation method for handling high-altitude route emergencies provided by the present invention comprises the following steps performed in sequence:

[0038] 1) Classify emergencies according to the nature of emergencies of civil aircraft flying on high-altitude routes;

[0039] The types of emergencies are divided into two categories: ① Group incidents of high-altitude flying aircraft: incidents that occur suddenly within the jurisdiction of high-altitude routes, and have or may cause a decline in air traffic control efficiency, suspension of air traffic services, and negative impacts on multiple aircraft, and require immediate measures to respond, including but not limited to: sudden catastrophic weather, interference from UFOs, and large-scale military activities; ② Individual incidents of high-altitude flying aircraft: incidents that occur suddenly within the jurisdiction of high-altitude routes, and individual aircraft encounter accidents, loss of contact, special circumstances, illegal interference, and severe weather, which have or may cause serious damage to the aircraft and casualties, and require immediate measures to respond, including but not limited to: engine failure, emergency fuel, mid-air fire, and bird strikes.

[0040] 2) Establish Figure 2 The evaluation index system for handling different types of emergencies shown includes three first-level evaluation indicators and corresponding second-level evaluation indicators for each first-level evaluation indicator;

[0041] The evaluation index system includes three first-level evaluation indicators, namely, safety index, priority handover index and detour / avoidance index; among them, the safety index includes five second-level evaluation indicators, namely, flight time of violation of safety interval, flight time of violation of safety altitude, time of sector resuming normal operation, percentage of sector capacity reduction and percentage of increase in controller communication time; the priority handover index includes three second-level evaluation indicators, namely, percentage of descent altitude optimization time, percentage of flight distance saved by priority handover and percentage of flight time saved by priority handover; the detour / avoidance index includes four second-level evaluation indicators, namely, percentage of extra flight distance for detour / avoidance, percentage of extra delay time for detour / avoidance, percentage of detour / avoidance aircraft sorties and average flight time of deviation from the route.

[0042] 3) Set the calculation method and evaluation criteria for the above-mentioned secondary evaluation indicators;

[0043] The calculation method of the secondary evaluation index includes: a calculation method of safety index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events; a calculation method of priority handover index for high-altitude aircraft individual events; a calculation method of detour / avoidance index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events;

[0044] The safety index calculation method for high-altitude aircraft group incidents and high-altitude aircraft individual incidents includes: calculating the average flight time x the time during which aircraft in the high-altitude route do not meet the safety interval requirements during the emergency handling period 1 , the calculation formula is In the formula, is the starting time when the aircraft pair k does not meet the safety separation requirements, is the time when aircraft pair k resumes meeting the safety separation requirement, N S The number of aircraft pairs that fail to meet safety separation requirements during emergency response;

[0045] Calculate the average flight time X during the emergency response period when the flight altitude of aircraft in the sector does not meet the safety altitude requirements 2 , the calculation formula is In the formula, is the starting time when aircraft i does not meet the safety altitude requirement, The time when aircraft i recovers to meet the safety altitude requirement, N H The number of aircraft that fail to meet the safety altitude requirements during emergency response;

[0046] Calculate the time X from the beginning of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route 3 , the calculation formula is X 3 =T N -T O , where T O is the starting time of the emergency, T N The time for the route to resume normal operation;

[0047] Calculate the percentage of traffic capacity reduction in high-altitude routes during emergency handling X 4 , the calculation formula is In the formula, Q S is the number of aircraft in the high-altitude route during the emergency response period, Q N The flight capacity of high-altitude routes under normal operating conditions;

[0048] Calculate the percentage of the controller's communication time during the emergency handling period exceeding that before the emergency X 5 , the calculation formula is Where, T DOis the communication time of the airway controller during the emergency handling period, T BO The communication time of the route controller before the emergency;

[0049] The calculation method for the priority transfer index of individual high-altitude aircraft incidents includes: calculating the ratio of the time saved by the controller taking emergency measures to make the special situation aircraft urgently descend to the transfer altitude during the emergency handling period to the original planned flight time X 6 , the calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency, is the time when the special situation aircraft i actually reaches the transfer altitude, The time when the special situation aircraft i is scheduled to arrive at the transfer altitude, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies;

[0050] Calculate the ratio of the flight distance saved when the controller adopts the emergency plan to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft during the emergency handling period to the originally planned flight distance X 7 , the calculation formula is In the formula, The flight distance transferred along the actual flight track for the special situation aircraft i, is the flight distance transferred along the planned flight path of the special situation aircraft i, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies;

[0051] Calculate the ratio of the flight time saved by the controller during the emergency handling period when the controller adopts the emergency plan to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft to the original planned flight time. 8 , the calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency, is the actual transfer time of special situation aircraft i, is the planned handover time of special situation aircraft i, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies;

[0052] The calculation method for the detour / avoidance index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events includes: calculating the ratio of the additional flight distance when the controller adopts the emergency plan to make the aircraft detour / avoid the dangerous area or special situation during the emergency handling process to the planned flight distance X 9 , the calculation formula is In the formula, The distance that the aircraft j flies along the actual flight path to bypass / avoid the aircraft. is the distance that aircraft j flies along the planned flight path, N PANumber of aircraft flights that detoured / avoided due to emergencies;

[0053] Calculate the ratio of the additional delay time to the planned flight time when the controller adopts an emergency plan to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during the emergency handling process. 10 , the calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency, The time when the circling / avoiding aircraft j actually arrives at the target position, The time when the circling / avoiding aircraft j is planned to arrive at the target position, N PA Number of aircraft flying around / avoiding due to emergencies;

[0054] Calculate the percentage of aircraft flights that the controller directs to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations in the process of emergency handling, which is the percentage of aircraft flights with normal capacity of high-altitude routes. 11 , the calculation formula is Where N PA The number of aircraft that flew around or avoided the incidents, Q N The flight capacity of high-altitude routes under normal operating conditions;

[0055] Calculate the average time X that the controller takes to deviate from the route during the emergency response process when directing aircraft to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations. 12 , the calculation formula is In the formula, The time when the flight of aircraft j deviates from the route for bypassing / avoiding is started. The starting time for the circling / avoiding aircraft j to resume flight on the route, N PA The number of aircraft flying around / avoiding due to emergencies.

[0056] The evaluation criteria of the above-mentioned secondary evaluation indicators are set according to the actual operation of aircraft in high-altitude routes, including: the average flight time of aircraft in high-altitude routes that do not meet the safety interval requirements during emergency handling x 1 The permissible duration of an aircraft not meeting the safe flight interval in an emergency that needs to be set; the average flight duration of an aircraft in a sector not meeting the safe altitude requirement during the emergency handling period X 2 The allowable duration that the aircraft does not meet the safe flight altitude in the event of an emergency that needs to be set; the duration from the start of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route X 3 The time limit from the start of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route; the percentage of the decrease in traffic capacity in the high-altitude route during the emergency handling period X 4The permissible value of the reduction in airway capacity during the emergency handling period that needs to be set; the percentage of the controller's communication time during the emergency handling period exceeding the percentage before the emergency X 5 The permissible value of the communication time increment of the route controller during the emergency handling period; during the emergency handling period, the controller adopts an emergency plan to make the special situation aircraft descend urgently, and the ratio of the time saved when reaching the transfer altitude to the original planned flight time is X 6 The lower limit requirement for the optimized descent altitude time during emergency handling is required; the ratio of the flight distance saved by the controller to the original planned flight distance when the controller adopts an emergency plan to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft during emergency handling. 7 The lower limit requirement for the distance saved by priority transfer during emergency handling is required; the ratio of the flight time saved by the controller when the emergency plan is adopted to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft during emergency handling to the original planned flight time is X 8 The lower limit requirement for the time saved by priority transfer during emergency handling; the ratio of the additional flight distance to the planned flight distance when the controller adopts emergency plans to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during emergency handling. 9 The upper limit of the additional flight distance required to fly around / avoid aircraft during emergency handling; the ratio of the additional delay time to the planned flight time when the controller adopts emergency plans to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during emergency handling. 10 The upper limit of the additional delay time for bypassing / avoiding aircraft during emergency handling is required; the percentage of aircraft flights that controllers use emergency plans to bypass / avoid dangerous areas or special situations in the normal capacity of high-altitude routes during emergency handling is X 11 The upper limit requirement for the proportion of aircraft flights that fly around / avoid during emergency handling is required; during the emergency handling process, the average time that the controller uses emergency plans to command aircraft to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations to deviate from the route is X 12 The upper limit requirement for the average flight time of circling / avoiding aircraft off-route during emergency response is required.

[0057] 4) When an emergency occurs to a civil aircraft flying on a high-altitude route, first determine the type of the emergency according to the method in step 1), then select the first and second level evaluation indicators related to the emergency response capability of the controller from the evaluation indicator system obtained in step 2), and then extract the objective operation data for calculating the above-mentioned second level evaluation indicators from the air traffic control automation system;

[0058] 5) Based on the objective operation data obtained in step 4), the specific values ​​of each secondary evaluation indicator are calculated using the calculation method of the secondary evaluation indicator set in step 3);

[0059] 6) If Figure 3 As shown, according to the evaluation criteria set in step 3) and the specific values ​​of the secondary evaluation indicators obtained in step 5), a triangular membership function is constructed to determine the evaluation vectors of the secondary evaluation indicators; the weight values ​​of the secondary evaluation indicators are determined by the hierarchical analysis method; the evaluation grade vectors of the secondary evaluation indicators are set; and then the above-mentioned evaluation vectors, weight values ​​and evaluation grade vectors are compositely calculated to obtain the quantitative score of the emergency command level of the controller in the high-altitude route emergency, which is used to intuitively reflect the ability and effect of the controller in handling unconventional emergencies.

[0060] The evaluation grades of the secondary evaluation indicators are divided into five grades: excellent, good, medium, pass and fail. The scores from 0 to 100 are divided into five intervals according to the percentage system and correspond to the corresponding grades respectively. The grade is assigned to the average score of the interval as the evaluation grade vector V of the corresponding secondary evaluation indicator:

[0061] grade excellent good middle Pass Fail Interval (90，100] (80，90] (70，80] (60，70] (0，60] Assignment <![CDATA[v 1 =95]]> <![CDATA[v 2 =85]]> <![CDATA[v 3 =75]]> <![CDATA[v 4 =65]]> <![CDATA[v 5 =30]]>

[0062] The formula of the composite operation is: S = W × A × V T

[0063] Where S is the quantitative score of the controller's emergency command level in high-altitude route emergencies, W is the weight value of the secondary evaluation index, A is the evaluation matrix composed of the evaluation vector of the secondary evaluation index, and V is the evaluation level vector of the secondary evaluation index.

[0064] Embodiment: During the process of directing an aircraft flying on a high-altitude route, a controller suddenly received an emergency information report from the pilot of an aircraft Z that was leaving and ascending to 6,900 meters that its left engine had failed and it needed to return immediately. At this time, there were two incoming aircraft in front of the aircraft, flying at altitudes of 6,600 meters and 6,000 meters respectively, which had descended to the target altitude according to the controller's instructions and were ready to be handed over to the terminal area control unit. The controller immediately confirmed with the pilot of aircraft Z whether to declare "emergency" or "distress". After learning that aircraft Z did not need to dump fuel and asking about the number of people on board and whether there were any dangerous goods, the controller promptly provided aircraft Z with the flight information of the high-altitude route, terminal area and departure airport, as well as the current flight weather and air traffic information; then, the controller immediately contacted the military according to the emergency command plan to open part of the temporary airspace for conflict coordination; then, the controller directed the above two incoming aircraft to leave the route to the open temporary airspace for maneuvering flight, and at the same time directed aircraft Z to descend and turn the course to fly directly to the handover position in the terminal area. After issuing the above instructions, the controller immediately informed the shift supervisor of the situation and asked him to notify the relevant units to prepare a special situation handling plan. 15 minutes later, aircraft Z was handed over to the terminal area control unit as a priority. The two incoming aircraft returned to the route after deviating from the route for 17 minutes. At the same time, the overall route resumed normal operation and all flow control restrictions were cancelled. During the handling of this emergency, no aircraft violated the safety interval and safety altitude on the high-altitude route, and a total of 21 flights were restricted from normal access, including inbound and outbound flights and high-altitude cruise flights.

[0065] The quantitative evaluation method for handling high-altitude route emergencies provided by the present invention is used below to evaluate the emergency command capability of the controller in the above-mentioned emergencies.

[0066] First of all, it is judged that the aircraft engine failure incident was an individual incident of a high-altitude aircraft.

[0067] Then, according to the type of emergency, establish Figure 2 The evaluation index system for handling the emergency is shown in Figure 1. The first and second level evaluation indexes selected for evaluating the emergency are: safety index, including: flight time of violation of safety interval X 1 , Violation of safe altitude flight time X 2 、Time for the route to resume normal operation X 3 、Percentage of decrease in high-altitude route capacity X 4 、Percentage increase in controller communication time X 5 ; Circumvention / avoidance indicators, including: Circumvention / avoidance extra flight distance percentage X 9 , Extra delay time percentage for circumvention / avoidance X 10 , the proportion of aircraft flying around / avoiding X 11, average flight time off route X 12 .

[0068] Then, the objective operation data of the above-mentioned secondary evaluation indicators are extracted from the air traffic control automation system, see Table 1.

[0069] Table 1

[0070]

[0071]

[0072] Then the values ​​of the above-mentioned secondary evaluation indicators are calculated, and the results are shown in Table 2.

[0073] Table 2

[0074]

[0075]

[0076] Then, the evaluation criteria for the above-mentioned secondary evaluation indicators are set according to the actual situation of high-altitude route operation, as shown in Table 3.

[0077] Table 3

[0078]

[0079] According to the indicator evaluation criteria set in Table 3, combined with the calculation results of each secondary evaluation indicator in Table 2, a triangular membership function is constructed and the evaluation vector of each secondary evaluation indicator is determined. The results are shown in Table 4.

[0080] Table 4

[0081]

[0082] The analytic hierarchy process is used to calculate the weight values ​​of the secondary evaluation indicators extracted from the emergency, as shown in Table 5.

[0083] Table 5

[0084]

[0085] The evaluation level is divided into five levels: excellent, good, medium, pass, and fail. The score from 0 to 100 is divided into five intervals according to the percentage system and corresponds to the corresponding level respectively. The level is assigned the average score of the interval. The evaluation level vector of the determined secondary evaluation index is shown in Table 6.

[0086] Table 6

[0087] grade excellent good middle Pass Fail Interval (90，100] (80，90] (70，80] (60，70] (0，60] Assignment <![CDATA[v 1 =95]]> <![CDATA[v 2 =85]]> <![CDATA[v 3 =75]]> <![CDATA[v 4 =65]]> <![CDATA[v 5 =30]]>

[0088] refer to Figure 3The calculation method for evaluating the handling of high-altitude route special situations shown in the figure is to perform a compound operation on the index weight vector W obtained in Table 5, the evaluation matrix A composed of the index evaluation vectors obtained in Table 4, and the index evaluation level vector V set in Table 6 according to the following formula to calculate the quantitative score S of the emergency command ability shown by the controller in handling the high-altitude route emergency, which is used to intuitively reflect the effect of the controller in handling this unconventional emergency:

[0089]

[0090] Therefore, the calculated score of 84.441 is the evaluation result of the controller's special situation handling level in this high-altitude route emergency incident.

Claims

1. A quantitative evaluation method for handling emergencies in high-altitude airways, characterized by: The quantitative evaluation method for handling the emergency events on high-altitude routes comprises the following steps performed in sequence: 1) Classify emergencies according to the nature of emergencies of civil aircraft flying on high-altitude routes; 2) Establish an evaluation index system for handling different types of emergencies, including three first-level evaluation indicators and corresponding second-level evaluation indicators for each first-level evaluation indicator; 3) Set the calculation method and evaluation criteria for the above-mentioned secondary evaluation indicators; 4) When an emergency occurs to a civil aircraft flying on a high-altitude route, first determine the type of the emergency according to the method in step 1), then select the first and second level evaluation indicators related to the emergency response capability of the controller from the evaluation indicator system obtained in step 2), and then extract the objective operation data for calculating the above-mentioned second level evaluation indicators from the air traffic control automation system; 5) Based on the objective operation data obtained in step 4), the specific values ​​of each secondary evaluation indicator are calculated using the calculation method of the secondary evaluation indicator set in step 3); 6) According to the evaluation criteria set in step 3) and the specific values ​​of the secondary evaluation indicators obtained in step 5), a triangular membership function is constructed to determine the evaluation vector of each secondary evaluation indicator; the weight value of each secondary evaluation indicator is determined by using the hierarchical analysis method; the evaluation grade vector of each secondary evaluation indicator is set; and then the above evaluation vector, weight value and evaluation grade vector are compositely calculated to obtain the quantitative score of the emergency command level of the controller in the high-altitude route emergency, which is used to intuitively reflect the ability and effect of the controller in handling unconventional emergencies.

2. The quantitative evaluation method for handling emergency events in high-altitude airways according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In step 1), the types of emergencies are divided into two categories: ① Group events of high-altitude flying aircraft: events that occur suddenly within the jurisdiction of high-altitude routes, have or may cause a decrease in air traffic control efficiency, suspension of air traffic services, and negative impacts on multiple aircraft, and require immediate measures to respond, including but not limited to: sudden catastrophic weather, interference from UFOs, and large-scale military activities; ② Individual events of high-altitude flying aircraft: events that occur suddenly within the jurisdiction of high-altitude routes, where individual aircraft encounter crashes, loss of contact, special situations, illegal interference, and severe weather, and have or may cause serious damage to the aircraft and casualties, and require immediate measures to respond, including but not limited to: engine failure, emergency fuel, mid-air fire, and bird strikes.

3. The quantitative evaluation method for handling emergency events in high-altitude airways according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In step 2), the evaluation index system includes three first-level evaluation indicators: safety index, priority handover index and detour / avoidance index; wherein, the safety index includes five second-level evaluation indicators: flight time violating safety interval, flight time violating safety altitude, time for sector to resume normal operation, percentage of sector capacity reduction and percentage of increase in controller communication time; the priority handover index includes three second-level evaluation indicators: percentage of optimized descent altitude time, percentage of flight distance saved by priority handover and percentage of flight time saved by priority handover; the detour / avoidance index includes four second-level evaluation indicators: percentage of additional flight distance for detour / avoidance, percentage of additional delay time for detour / avoidance, proportion of detour / avoidance aircraft sorties and average flight time off route.

4. The quantitative evaluation method for handling emergency events in high-altitude airways according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In step 3), the calculation method of the secondary evaluation index includes: a calculation method of a safety index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events; a calculation method of a priority handover index for high-altitude aircraft individual events; a calculation method of a detour / avoidance index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events; Among them, the safety index calculation method for high-altitude aircraft group incidents and high-altitude aircraft individual incidents includes: calculating the average flight time X1 of aircraft in high-altitude routes that do not meet the safety interval requirements during the emergency handling period, and the calculation formula is: In the formula, is the starting time when the aircraft pair k does not meet the safety separation requirements, is the time when aircraft pair k resumes meeting the safety separation requirement, N S The number of aircraft pairs that fail to meet safety separation requirements during emergency response; Calculate the average flight time X2 during the emergency response period when the flight altitude of aircraft in the sector does not meet the safety altitude requirements. The calculation formula is: In the formula, is the starting time when aircraft i does not meet the safety altitude requirement, The time when aircraft i recovers to meet the safety altitude requirement, N H The number of aircraft that fail to meet the safety altitude requirements during emergency response; Calculate the time X3 from the beginning of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route. The calculation formula is X3 = T N -T O , where T O is the starting time of the emergency, T N The time for the route to resume normal operation; Calculate the percentage of the decrease in traffic capacity within the high-altitude route during the emergency handling period X4, the calculation formula is: In the formula, Q S is the number of aircraft in the high-altitude route during the emergency response period, Q N The flight capacity of high-altitude routes under normal operating conditions; Calculate the percentage of the communication time of the controller during the emergency handling period exceeding the time before the emergency X5, the calculation formula is: Where, T DO is the communication time of the airway controller during the emergency handling period, T BO The communication time of the route controller before the emergency; The calculation method for the priority transfer index of individual events of high-altitude aircraft includes: calculating the ratio of the time saved by the controller taking emergency measures to make the special situation aircraft descend to the transfer altitude during the emergency handling period to the original planned flight time X6, and the calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency is the time when the special situation aircraft i actually reaches the transfer altitude, The time when the special situation aircraft i is scheduled to arrive at the transfer altitude, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies; Calculate the ratio of the flight distance saved when the controller adopts an emergency plan to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft during the emergency handling period to the originally planned flight distance X7. The calculation formula is: In the formula, The flight distance transferred along the actual flight track for the special situation aircraft i, is the flight distance transferred along the planned flight path of the special situation aircraft i, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies; Calculate the ratio of the flight time saved by the controller during the emergency handling period when the controller adopts the emergency plan to give priority to the transfer of special situation aircraft to the original planned flight time X8. The calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency is the actual transfer time of special situation aircraft i, is the planned handover time of special situation aircraft i, N PH The number of aircraft that are given priority for transfer due to emergencies; The calculation method for the detour / avoidance index for high-altitude aircraft group events and high-altitude aircraft individual events includes: calculating the ratio of the additional flight distance when the controller adopts an emergency plan to make the aircraft detour / avoid the dangerous area or special situation during the emergency handling process to the planned flight distance X9, the calculation formula is In the formula, The distance that the aircraft j flies along the actual flight path to bypass / avoid the aircraft. is the distance that aircraft j flies along the planned flight path, N PA Number of aircraft flights that detoured / avoided due to emergencies; Calculate the ratio of the additional delay time to the planned flight time when the controller adopts an emergency plan to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during the emergency handling process. 10 , the calculation formula is Where, T O The starting time of the emergency The time when the circling / avoiding aircraft j actually arrives at the target position, The time when the circling / avoiding aircraft j is planned to arrive at the target position, N PA Number of aircraft flying around / avoiding due to emergencies; Calculate the percentage of aircraft flights that the controller directs to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations in the process of emergency handling, which is the percentage of aircraft flights with normal capacity of high-altitude routes. 11 , the calculation formula is Where N PA The number of aircraft that flew around or avoided the incidents, Q N The flight capacity of high-altitude routes under normal operating conditions; Calculate the average time X that the controller takes to deviate from the route during the emergency response process when directing aircraft to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations. 12 , the calculation formula is In the formula, The time when the flight of aircraft j deviates from the route for bypassing / avoiding is started. The starting time for the circling / avoiding aircraft j to resume flight on the route, N PA The number of aircraft flying around / avoiding due to emergencies.

5. The quantitative evaluation method for handling emergency events in high-altitude airways according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In step 3), the evaluation criteria of each secondary evaluation index are set according to the actual operation of the aircraft in the high-altitude route, including: the average flight time of aircraft in the high-altitude route that does not meet the safety interval requirements during the emergency handling X1, which is the allowable time for aircraft to not meet the safety flight interval in the emergency; the average flight time of aircraft in the sector that does not meet the safety altitude requirements during the emergency handling X2, which is the allowable time for aircraft to not meet the safety flight altitude in the emergency; the time from the start of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route X3, which is the limited time from the start of the emergency to the resumption of normal operation of the route; the percentage of the decrease in capacity in the high-altitude route during the emergency handling X4, which is the allowable value of the percentage of the decrease in route capacity during the emergency handling; the percentage of the communication time of the controller during the emergency handling exceeding the percentage before the emergency X5, which is the allowable value of the increase in the communication time of the route controller during the emergency handling; the emergency measures taken by the controller during the emergency handling The ratio of the time saved when the aircraft with special situations is transferred to the transfer altitude by the emergency plan to the originally planned flight time is X6. The lower limit requirement for the optimized time of descending altitude during emergency handling is required; the ratio of the flight distance saved when the controller adopts the emergency plan to transfer the aircraft with special situations first to the originally planned flight distance during emergency handling is X7. The lower limit requirement for the distance saved by priority transfer during emergency handling is required; the ratio of the flight time saved when the controller adopts the emergency plan to transfer the aircraft with special situations first to the originally planned flight time during emergency handling is X8. The lower limit requirement for the time saved by priority transfer during emergency handling is required; the ratio of the additional flight distance to the planned flight distance when the controller adopts the emergency plan to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during emergency handling is X9. The upper limit requirement for the additional flight distance to be set for the aircraft to fly around / avoid during emergency handling is X9. The ratio of the additional delay time to the planned flight time when the controller adopts the emergency plan to make the aircraft fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations during emergency handling is X 10 The upper limit of the additional delay time for bypassing / avoiding aircraft during emergency handling is required; the percentage of aircraft flights that controllers use emergency plans to bypass / avoid dangerous areas or special situations in the normal capacity of high-altitude routes during emergency handling is X 11 The upper limit requirement for the proportion of aircraft flights that fly around / avoid during emergency handling is required; during the emergency handling process, the average time that the controller uses emergency plans to command aircraft to fly around / avoid dangerous areas or special situations to deviate from the route is X 12 The upper limit requirement for the average flight time of circling / avoiding aircraft off-route during emergency response is required.

6. The quantitative evaluation method for handling emergency events in high-altitude airways according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In step 6), the evaluation level of the secondary evaluation index is divided into five levels: excellent, good, medium, pass and fail. The score from 0 to 100 is divided into five intervals according to the percentage system and corresponds to the corresponding level respectively. The level is assigned to the average score of the interval as the evaluation level vector V of the corresponding secondary evaluation index: 。 7. The quantitative evaluation method for handling emergency events in high-altitude airways according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In step 6), the formula of the composite operation is: S = W × A × V T Where S is the quantitative score of the controller's emergency command level in high-altitude route emergencies, W is the weight value of the secondary evaluation index, A is the evaluation matrix composed of the evaluation vector of the secondary evaluation index, and V is the evaluation level vector of the secondary evaluation index.

Images